UN Report Blasts Syria

[bigfish]

Dubious Witnesses

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=viewArticle&code=PAR20051023&articleId=1133

One of the problems with such “witnesses” is that they can be unreliable for a variety of reasons, including the possibility they are paid or otherwise induced to present false stories to help achieve a result favored by powerful political figures or countries.

The United States – and the New York Times – learned this lesson during the run-up to war in Iraq when Iraqi exile groups arranged for supposed witnesses to approach U.S. officials and journalists with information about Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction, claims that turned out to be fabricated.

(Similar questions are already being raised about the key Hariri-case witness Saddik. Der Spiegel, the German newsmagazine, reported that Saddik is a convicted swindler who was caught in lies by the U.N. investigative team. Der Spiegel also reported that the intermediary for Saddik's testimony was Syrian dissident Rifaat al-Assad, who opposes the regime of his nephew President Bashar Assad, and that Saddik apparently was paid for supplying his testimony. Saddik called his brother from Paris in late summer and declared, “I've become a millionaire,” the brother said, according to Der Spiegel.)

This risk of investigators accepting questionable testimony from dubious sources is highest when the allegations are directed against countries or political leaders already held in disdain – as was the case with Iraq and is now the case with Syria. With almost everyone ready to believe the worst, few investigators or journalists are willing to endanger their reputations and careers by demanding a high level of proof. It's easier to go with the flow.

 

[slaar]

That's all very well bigfish, but I'm yet to see a scrap of evidence for the counter-factual.

 

[bigfish]

That's all very well bigfish, but I'm yet to see a scrap of evidence for the counter-factual.

No and you're not likely to either as proving a negative is inherently impossible. But then you already know that, don't you?

 

[mears]

No and you're not likely to either as proving a negative is inherently impossible. But then you already know that, don't you?

Some Islamic radicals are responsible for enabling suicide bombers to kill innocent Israeli citizens. So in that instance Israel has a right to defend itself and kill the leaders of these suicide factories.

Now let me ask you a question. Do you believe Israel is soley responsible for their conflict with the Palestinians?

 

[bigfish]

... Do you believe Israel is soley responsible for their conflict with the Palestinians?

Yes, who else could be responsible? After all, ever since its foundation, the state of Israel has functioned more or less as an expanding military fortress, oppressing the Palestinian people through military rule and racial apartheid and systematically expelling them from their rightful ancestral lands.

 

[mears]

Yes, who else could be responsible? After all, ever since its foundation, the state of Israel has functioned more or less as an expanding military fortress, oppressing the Palestinian people through military rule and racial apartheid and systematically expelling them from their rightful ancestral lands.

Completely responsible. I mean all of Israels neighbors at one time refused to acknowledge its existence, but thats Israel's fault. Arabs treat Palestinians like dirt but its all Israels fault.

At least you now realize AL Queda is responsible for 9-11?
http://www.cbc.ca/story/world/national/2004/10/29/binladen_message041029.html

Gone fishing indeed.

 

[nino_savatte]

Some Islamic radicals are responsible for enabling suicide bombers to kill innocent Israeli citizens. So in that instance Israel has a right to defend itself and kill the leaders of these suicide factories.

Now let me ask you a question. Do you believe Israel is soley responsible for their conflict with the Palestinians?

Did you read this before you posted it, mears? Because this is one of the dumbest questions I've ever seen you ask.

 

[bigfish]

The plot thickens

Detlev Mehlis’ role in the investigation into the La Belle bombing raises disturbing questions about his role in the investigation of the assassination of Hariri. As Berlin public prosecutor, Mehlis inadvertently but consistently covered up the dubious involvement of US, Israeli and German intelligence interests in the 1986 terrorist attack; actively built a selective politically-motivated case against suspects without objective material proof; while ignoring and protecting a group of suspects with documented connections to western secret services. This background fundamentally challenges the credibility of his investigation of the Hariri assassination.

An electronic version of Mehlis’ report for the UN commission sent to various media outlets identifies Maher Assad, brother of the Syrian president Bashar al-Assad, and their brother-in-law Asef Shawkat, the chief of military intelligence, along with three others, as the key alleged conspirators behind the plot. Yet Mehlis cites as his source for these officials’ names – the crux of his report’s allegations - a single anonymous Syrian living in Lebanon purportedly in contact with Syrian officers posted there. Explaining why the names were removed in the version transmitted to the Security Council, Mehlis noted the importance of the “presumption of innocence,” since the entire accusation of Syrian government culpability boiled down to only one anonymous source. “It could give the wrong impression that this was an established fact”, he cautioned.

Indeed, UN sources cited by the respected German newsmagazine Der Spiegel on 22nd October identified Mehlis’ central source as Zuheir al-Siddiq, a criminal convicted of fraud and embezzlement, who had clearly lied in his testimony, contradicting himself several times.

more...

 

[slaar]

No and you're not likely to either as proving a negative is inherently impossible. But then you already know that, don't you?

Proving that mossad or another agency with the interests that some have claimed on this thread is not proving a negative. As you well know.

 

[tangentlama]

Central witness to Mehlis report revealed as a paid swindler

more...

interesting...

Hamburg, 22 October - The most prestigious German political
news-magazine, Der Spiegel, revealed today that the central witness,
Zuheir al-Siddiq on whom Detlev Mehlis had relied during his
investigations into the assault on Rafiq Hariri, was a dubious person
with a criminal record as a convicted felon and swindler. Even the UN
Commission which had submitted the Mehlis report to the UN Security
Council yesterday, is raising serious doubts about the reliability and
credibility of al-Siddiq's declarations, since it was revealed that
the alleged former officer of the Syrian secret services had in
reality been convicted more than once for penal offences related to
money subtraction.

The German magazine reports that the UN investigating Commission is
well aware that it had been lied to by Siddiq, who at first had affirmed
to have left Beirut one month before the assault on al-Hariri, but
then had to admit at the end of September his direct involvement in
the implementation of the crime. It is quite evident by now that the
witness had received money for his depositions, considering that his
siblings reveal to have received a phone-call from him from Paris, in
late summer, in which Siddiq announced "I have become a millionaire".
Doubts regarding the credibility of the man were further fuelled by
the revelation that Siddiq had been recommended to Mehlis by the
long-term Syrian renegate Rifaat al-Assad, an uncle of the Syrian
President who more than once offered himself as "alternative President
of Syria".

To Mehlis the central witness Siddiq is supposed to have declared that
he had put his apartment in Beirut to the disposition of the
conspirators to kill Hariri, among them several Syrian intelligence
officials. Of himself he had declared to have gathered intelligence
for the Syrian services regarding Palestinian refugee camps in
Lebanon. But the Syrian government, revealed Der Spiegel, had sent
weeks ago a documentation regarding the man to various Western
governments, hoping that Detlev Mehlis would not get caught in the
trap of a notorious imposter.

see : http://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/0,1518,381056,00.html (german)

 

[bigfish]

Proving that mossad or another agency with the interests that some have claimed on this thread is not proving a negative. As you well know.

I'm sorry, but what you say here doesn't appear to make any sense.

 

[bigfish]

Detlev Mehlis - exposed

On August 25 1998 the German ZDF TV magazine Frontal provided evidence that some of the main suspects in the 1986 Berlin disco bombing—the stated reason for the lethal assault on Libya—worked for American and Israeli intelligence. The State Prosecutor who was complicit in concealing the involvement of the CIA and Mossad was none other than... Detlev Mehlis who has now revealed the authors and masterminds of the Hariri assassination.

German TV exposes CIA, Mossad links to 1986 Berlin disco bombing

What the German documentary reveals

The Frontal report arrives at the following conclusions:

1) The lead defendant presently on trial, Yasser Chraidi, is very possibly innocent, and is being used as a scapegoat by German and American intelligence services.

2) At least one of the defendants, Musbah Eter, has been working for the CIA over many years.

3) Some of the key suspects have not appeared in court, because they are being protected by Western intelligence services.

4) At least one of those, Mohammed Amairi, is an agent of Mossad, the Israeli secret service.

 

[slaar]

I'm sorry, but what you say here doesn't appear to make any sense.

Your argument appears to be that the assassination was done covertly to act as a pretext for US and Israeli action in the region. This isn't a negative, it's a positive accusation, so with a bit of evidence should be proveable. But there isn't any.

It's not exactly like this is an isolated bombing. It happened in the context of 30 years of Syrian presence in the country, the Damascus elites treating Lebanon like their own personal property, and their desparation that they can continue making money that way. It also happened in the context of an ongoing and frequent campaign of assassinations of anti-Syrian politicians, media and public figures, all using similar methods.

That being the case I suggest the onus is on others to prove their case.

Have you actually read the report anyway? Not all the evidence revolves around the witness, and in any case a lot of the evidence is corroborated by other information; for example the van being logged as entering Lebanon from Syria through a Syrian military channel.

I am not arguing that the case is watertight, I am arguing that there is not an alternative story right now.

 

[bigfish]

Your argument appears to be that the assassination was done covertly to act as a pretext for US and Israeli action in the region. This isn't a negative, it's a positive accusation, so with a bit of evidence should be proveable. But there isn't any.

My argument here is that Detlev Mehlis’ earlier role in the investigation into the La Belle discotheque bombing in Germany (where it has been shown that he contrived to ignore or cover-up the parts played by US, Israeli and German intelligence interests in the conspiracy) must raise very serious doubts about his credibility and therefore his role in the UN investigation into the assassination of Hariri.

It's not exactly like this is an isolated bombing. It happened in the context of 30 years of Syrian presence in the country, the Damascus elites treating Lebanon like their own personal property, and their desparation that they can continue making money that way. It also happened in the context of an ongoing and frequent campaign of assassinations of anti-Syrian politicians, media and public figures, all using similar methods.

That being the case I suggest the onus is on others to prove their case.

I'm afraid your suggestion is complete bollocks. The onus is on those accusing Syria of Hariri's assassination to substantiate the charge with objective material evidence and not on anyone else to prove an alternative possible scenario or "counter-factual" as you like to call it.

I am not arguing that the case is watertight, I am arguing that there is not an alternative story right now.

But if the case is not "watertight," then there really is no case.

 

[slaar]

Certainly agree with that. I was conflating your posts with those of others throwing around accusations, probably because of your comment about "lickspittle apologists", which I am not. Apologies for that. The fact remains that a very short time in Beirut talking to people puts the Syrians squarely in the firing line. Have to see what other evidence comes up.

 

[sparticus]

What double standards? What bullshit?

Sure Syria is suspected of murdering Hariri just as some people suspect Isreal's involvement. Some people suspect bin Laden for 9/11 and some suspect the US.

But suspicion does not equal proof. Suspicion does not equal hard evidence.

There is considerably more hard evidence to support suspicion of the US in 9/11 than there is linking Syria to Hariri, so who can argue with the logic of Syria as explained here

Atleast US and UK haven't presented us with a dossier this time. Perhaps they've learnt a lesson and found someone else to do their lying for them this time.

The other difference between 9/11 and Hariri is that in the case of 9/11 the US government could so easily disprove so many of the suspicions laid at their door by releasing various bits of evidence such as the pentagon film footage, the towers steel work, the crash debris from Shankville, the black boxes, etc, etc.

 

[TAE]

The most prestigious German political news-magazine ...

... is most certainly not Der Spiegel.

 

[TAE]

Syria rejects U.N. resolution

 

[nino_savatte]

Here we go again.

I heard Rice on telly last night and if you took out the word "Syria" and replaced it with the word "Iraq", you could have sworn this was the same rhetoric used in the run up to the invasion of Iraq.

 

[bigfish]

Syria rejects U.N. resolution

From the link:

Syria's Foreign Minister Farouk al-Sharaa said the U.N. report convicted Syria before it faced trial, and he wondered why the United Nations had assumed its forces were guilty just because they were in Lebanon at the time of the bombing.

He said accusing Syria of having advance knowledge of the killing was tantamount to charging that U.S. officials knew about the September 11 attacks on America.

"We would have to point out accusations at the U.S. security organs as having been aware of terrorist attacks that were perpetrated in 9-11-2001," said al-Sharaa.

British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw was quick to respond to his comment, calling it "as the most grotesque and insensitive comparison."

 

[bigfish]

Seymour Hersh commenting on the Mehlis report...

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20051031.wxhersh31/BNStory/Entertainment

Hersh recently got hold of a copy of the United Nations interim report by German prosecutor Detlev Mehlis on the assassination of former Lebanese prime minister Rafik Hariri. The document cited "converging evidence" that senior levels of the Syrian government were involved in the murder.

But according to Hersh, the Mehlis report is built on the same anemic foundations as Powell's UN presentation in February, 2003. "He is relying on intercepts of an unnamed source inside the Iranian air force, someone without inside stuff. It's not empirical." On the basis of this thin evidence, he says, the Bush administration is campaigning at the UN for sanctions on Syria.

 

[fela fan]

British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw was quick to respond to his comment, calling it "as the most grotesque and insensitive comparison."

Comments like this lead me to my suspicions that insanity stalks those in power...

 

[sparticus]

This is my point precisely. Why is the comparison "grotesque and insensitive" exactly? It seems you can make all kinds of dark threats as long as you hold suspicions against the right type of rogue state. But its grotesque and insensitive when the good olde boys are suspected. I think the comparison is completely appropriate

 

[bigfish]

Me too.

Straw's a consummate liar.

 

[Poi E]

Straw's a consummate liar.

Waltzing into Washington and strutting around Strasbourg like the pompous prick he is, he's won no friends for the UK.

 

[fela fan]

Waltzing into Washington and strutting around Strasbourg like the pompous prick he is, he's won no friends for the UK.

Ah man, the fucker is off his head. Any listening to him will confirm this.

 

[Jangla]

... I believe Israel is guilty for many acts, like ... bombing Islamic radicals without paying enough attention to collateral damage.

I seem to remember you vociferously defending US troops and their collateral damage in Iraq as it was a "fact of war". Double standards?

 

[Barking_Mad]

Mears is always upset unless its his side that's doing the killing. In which case he can use his blind eye.

 

[bigfish]

Bashing Syria: Another Trojan Horse from the UN?

It’s happening all over again. This time Syria has received the kiss of the White House don just as laid-out in the 1996 neo-con rule book “Clean Break”, conceived on the bidding of none other than the Israel far-right’s chief thug Benjamin Netanyahu.

The fact that the cabal is religiously sticking to its agenda is predictable but it’s, surely, shocking that world leaders seem bent on bowing to the Bush bullies like a bunch of sycophantic schoolboys even as the Italian premier Berlusconi is saying his mea culpas over Iraq.

More...

 

[bigfish]

Rolling back Syria

http://www.counterpunch.com/baroud11022005.html

Considering that nearly all of the competing forces on the Lebanon stage, whether internally or externally, maintain their interests in the country's affairs, thus involvement, it's unscrupulous, to say the least, to heap the criticism on Syria alone for Lebanon's misfortunes, past and present, and to solely single out Damascus as the only likely suspect in Hariri's murder. It's ironic that those who have for long contributed to Lebanon's demise are now the main players in leading the fault-finding chorus, demanding justice and the 'truth'.

This should not in any way suggest that Syria's record in Lebanon was a shining example of courtesy and decency. Syria's thrust in Lebanon had little to do with alleviating the country's woes. It certainly had more to do with sheltering and benefiting Syria itself, an objective that often lead to abuses of power, unwarranted interference in Lebanon's political affairs and ultimately to near complete hegemony over the country's sovereignty.

But to act as if the international uproar lead by the Bush Administration, more specifically the pro-Israeli elements within the administration, is a sincere endeavor to unmask the truth and bring Hariri's murderers to justice is to succumb yet to another mockery as sizeable as that of Iraq's alleged WMDs.